Costs of threatened institute building

I am afraid Commonwealth secretary general Don McKinnon's account of the Commonwealth Institute issue (Letters, June 24) is misleading. Last year he called the UK's decision to maintain a preservation order on the institute "selfish imperialism". He also condemned the building as a white elephant. He now makes the astonishing statement that it had been "deliberately built as a temporary structure". It must be the first "temporary" structure designed by distinguished architects in pre-stressed concrete and topped by a copper roof. Not to mention that in 1988 it became a listed building.

The trustees main concern is the site's value as a financial asset. Shortly after spending about £3m of taxpayers money on refurbishing the roof and structure, the trustees put the building and site on the market in 2003. Most staff were made redundant, and in 2004 the trustees applied for a review of the institute's listed status so the maximum value could be obtained from the sale of the site.

It is misleading to say the building has been paid for by 53 countries collectively, or ever been maintained or managed by them. Generous gifts of materials were made to the building by the small number of countries in the Commonwealth in 1962, but the government took on the major responsibility and cost of construction and all the subsequent maintenance and staffing costs.

The government handed over the institute to an independent charity and trust in 2000. The trustees are responsible for the business of the institute under the Companies Act. Therefore, it remains difficult to be reassured that the case of the institute does not set a precedent. James Porter Director general, Commonwealth Institute 1978-91